In the automotive industry, servicing driveline fluids has become more complex. With a multitude of different blends, viscosities and retail container packaging, pouring required lubrication fluids into a funnel to reach a service fill port is no longer a convenient or simple task. Most service applications do not involve a dipstick or similar means of checking fluid levels that require service. Most service fill ports are accessed at locations underneath the vehicle and are difficult to reach or obstructed by body or vehicle frame components. Typical transmissions and axle differentials can only be serviced with some type of fluid transfer pumping method to replenish the fluid since they cannot be filled by gravity flow.
Present alternative methods have drawbacks. For example, some retail package squeeze type fluid bottles have a tapered spout cap and one must invert the container to remove it contents by grasping and squeezing the bottle and or attaching a length of flexible hose to reach inaccessible service port. This method creates numerous problems. (1) The flexible hose usually has a poor fit on the smooth tapered container spout and slides off. (2) The length of flexible hose may have a smaller inside diameter than the tapered container spout precluding a positive connection to the spout. With the smaller diameter length of hose, fluid transfer is restricted and requires more internal bottle pressure by squeezing and/or by a clamping device on such container. (3) With higher internal bottle pressure required for transferring such fluid, the poor fit of a flexible hose installed on a tapered spout leads to a very high percentage of the hose disconnecting from the spout end. (4) When the hose connection fails and the fluid being transferred is a lubricant, not only may leak that needs attention may result, but also the spout end becomes lubricated, which complicates the retaining of the flexible hose connection to the spout end. (5) The tapered spout cap design, does not allow use of some type of a hose retaining/clamping device. (6) When the service fill port is located at a higher location and obstructed, for example, by a structural frame member, a longer flexible hose is required to reach the service fill port. This compounds the existing problems of fluid transfer. Further, because the container still needs to be inverted to remove all contents, which usually requires even a longer flexible hose. This compounds fluid transfer resistance. (7) Most squeeze type lubricant fluid bottles in the retail market have a foil gasket seal of some type under the threaded spout cap. This gasket prevents fluid content leakage until used by the end consumer and must be removed prior to usage. If the gasket seal is not completely removed from the bottle throat top, the spout cap will not create a liquid impervious seal and leakage may then occur when increasing internal bottle pressure to pump fluid contents. Even with all of the gasket seal removed, bottle manufacturing tolerances are inconsistent and a poor fit to a bottle throat by a spout cap may result in leakage. (8) When such a task is done, the length of flexible hose needs to be cleaned so if used again with a different type of fluid, contamination will not occur.
One solution enabling use of an original factory package (container/vessel) is to provide an additional pump mechanism that threads onto the bottle. This method creates numerous problems also: (1) It may require a hand pump that threads onto the container with a long length of flexible hose to reach the service fill port. (2) The pump mechanism needs to be designed exclusively for the bottle thread pitch and depth. (3) Holding the container/bottle with one hand and operating a hand pump with the other hand may cause the flexible hose to become loose and not retained in a service port and possibly disconnect thereby creating leakage. (4) Most pumps are poorly made and leak around the pump seal handle after a few usages. (5) After usage, cleanup of such pump assemblies are very difficult and time consuming. Cleaning solvents to completely remove all fluid contaminates for the next usage may be required. Cleaning solvents may be harsh and attack the pump components and increase the rate of pump seal and hose failure. (6) Upon usage over time, the flexible hose may become stiff or rigid due to being subjected to chemicals, which makes use and cleaning difficult. (7) When not in use, storage of such pump and hose assemblies requires some type of residue leakage containment.
Additional alternate methods of fluid replacement include transfer of fluid lubricant into a separate container or pumping device to reach a service port. This coincides with recent changes of lubrication fluids and packaging. Most factory retail packaging has changed bottle design of throat size and thread pitch. This requires an additional external container to be filled first with the original fluid contents, and then dispensed by some type of pumping method.
These alternative methods have created numerous problems also: Method (ONE) The use of a hand suction pump or a push pull pump with multiple flexible hoses. (1) Requires the hose of the suction cylinder to be inserted into fluid container to pull fluid into the suction cylinder, and then pump into the service port. This type of method creates residue on the external part of the hose which, in turn creates a mess. (2) Requires use of both hands to operate, leaving the hose loose in the service port for possible leakage. (3) Most hand suction pumps are difficult to use with higher viscosity/thicker fluids. (4) Most hand suction pumps leak after a few usages. (5) Usage over time may cause, the flexible hose to become stiff or rigid due to being subjected to chemicals. (6) When operating a push/pull pump, one end of a hose is inserted into the fluid container and the other end is inserted to the service port. Both hose ends are loose in their perspective ports. The most common failure is that the fluid supply bottle is not being secured thereby tipping the fluid container due to hose movement while pumping. (7) Once service of fluid is completed, the amount of fluid residue in the hoses leaks until transferred to the next container or cleaned for storage.
Alternate Method (TWO) In-line hand powered, electric or pneumatically powered rotary pumps require use of both hands to operate the pump with two long flexible hoses, one on each end. The same problems as alternate method (ONE & TWO) are observed.
Alternate Method (THREE) Air pressurized container to push fluid through a flexible hose to service port, (1) Requires service fluid to be transferred first to a vessel/container. Then the container is pressurized by means of a hand air pump or compressor. (2) A length of flexible hose from pressurized container to reach the service port location is required. (3) Some type of shut off valve when servicing is required to stop fluid dispensing. (4) Man of the same problems as observed for methods ONE and TWO are observed. (5) Cleanup is more complicated and time consuming. (6) System is not a cost effective for the end user.